Learn Hardcore Latin: Puer fessus matrem rogat: "Quid hodie in horto facere possumus, si avia non cantat?" - The tired boy asks mother: "What can we do in the garden today, if grandmother does not sing?"

Latin has no words for the or a. The simple puer can be translated as the boy or a boy depending on context. Here, because we usually talk about a specific child, we translate puer as the boy.

You can understand puer fessus either as:

the tired boy (adjective closely linked: attributive), or
the boy, tired, ... (more like extra information: predicative).

In practice, both come out the same in English.

Why is matrem in the accusative case, and what does it depend on?

Matrem is the direct object of the verb rogat.

matrem = mother, accusative singular feminine (object case)
rogat = he asks

The verb rogo in Latin takes a direct object in the accusative for the person you ask:

matrem rogat = he asks (his) mother

Latin rogo can also take two accusatives: a person and a thing:

matrem rogō consilium = I ask my mother for advice (literally: I ask mother advice).

You do not use the dative with rogo (materī would be wrong here).

What is the grammatical function of quid here, and why is it quid and not quod or quis?

Quid is an interrogative pronoun meaning what and is functioning as the object of facere.

quid is neuter nominative/accusative singular of the question word quis, quid.
In quid ... facere possumus, the quid is what is being done, so it’s the object of facere (to do what?).

It is quid because:

We are asking what (a thing in general), not who (a person) → so not quis.
It is neuter because what is an unspecified thing.
It is in the accusative because it is the object of facere.

So: quid facere possumus = what can we do?

How does quid hodie in horto facere possumus work? Why is the infinitive facere used with possumus?

Latin uses possum + infinitive to express can / be able to do something.

possumus = we can / we are able
facere = to do (infinitive)

So facere possumus literally means we are able to do, which we naturally translate as we can do.

Word by word:

quid = what (object of facere)
hodie = today (adverb)
in horto = in the garden (prepositional phrase)
facere = to do
possumus = we can

Latin word order is flexible, so quid possumus hodie in horto facere would also be correct. The grouping facere possumus nicely keeps to do / can together.

Why is the verb possumus in the first person plural (we can) when the main subject is puer (he)?

The verb possumus belongs to the direct speech, not to the narrative:

Outside the quotation: Puer fessus matrem rogat = The tired boy asks his mother (3rd person singular).
Inside the quotation: Quid ... facere possumus? = What can we do? (1st person plural).

Within the boy’s own words, he is including himself with at least one other person (most naturally his mother): we. So he is asking:

What can *we do in the garden today, if grandma isn’t singing?*

So the change from 3rd singular (rogat) to 1st plural (possumus) is normal: narrative vs. the character’s own speech.

What exactly is hodie, and where does it fit in the sentence?

Hodie is an adverb meaning today.

It does not change its form (no case, no gender, no number).
It modifies the whole action facere possumus (what can we do today).

Position:

Quid hodie in horto facere possumus = What can we do in the garden today?
Hodie quid in horto facere possumus would also be fine; adverbs move quite freely.

In English, we can also move today around:
What can we do in the garden today? / What can we today do in the garden? (the Latin freedom is more like the second).

Why is it in horto and not in hortum? What case is horto?

Horto is the ablative singular of hortus (garden).

The preposition in in Latin can take either:

ablative = place where (location): in horto = in the garden
accusative = place to which (motion): in hortum = into the garden

Here, the meaning is doing something in the garden (in that place), not going into the garden, so the ablative is correct: in horto.

Why is there no word for we before possumus, or she before cantat?

Latin usually omits subject pronouns because the person and number are already shown by the verb ending.

possumus ends in -mus → 1st person plural → we can
cantat ends in -t → 3rd person singular → he/she/it sings

So:

possumus alone = we can
cantat alone = he/she/it sings

You would add explicit pronouns (nōs, ea, etc.) only for emphasis or contrast, e.g.:

Nōs facere possumus, sed avia nōn cantat.
We can do it, but grandmother is not singing.

In this sentence, simple verb endings are enough.

What kind of clause is si avia non cantat, and why is cantat in the indicative, not the subjunctive?

Si avia non cantat is a conditional clause introduced by si (if).

si = if
avia = grandmother (nominative, subject)
non cantat = does not sing / is not singing

This is a real / open condition in the present, so Latin uses the present indicative:

si avia non cantat = if grandmother does not sing / isn’t singing

If it were contrary-to-fact (imaginary), Latin would use a subjunctive, for example:

Si avia non caneret, tristēs essemus.
If grandmother were not singing, we would be sad.

In your sentence, the boy is thinking of a real present/future situation, so cantat in the indicative is exactly right.

Why is avia in the nominative, while matrem is in the accusative? Aren’t they both people?

They are both people, but they have different grammatical roles:

matrem (accusative) is the direct object of rogat: he asks (his) mother.
avia (nominative) is the subject of cantat: grandmother sings.

So:

Puer fessus matrem rogat → The tired boy asks (his) mother.
si avia non cantat → if grandmother does not sing.

Case in Latin is determined by function in the clause, not by meaning (mother vs grandmother).

What exactly does cantat mean here: sings, is singing, or will sing?

Cantat is present indicative:

Basic meaning: she sings or she is singing.

In context, with hodie and si, Latin present can also refer to the near future:

si avia non cantat can be understood as:
if grandma does not sing (today) / if grandma isn’t singing (today) / if grandma doesn’t sing (later today).

Latin often uses the present indicative where English would naturally choose present or future; the exact English tense depends on what sounds most natural.

Why is a colon used after rogat, and is this direct speech or indirect speech?

This is direct speech.

Puer fessus matrem rogat: → The tired boy asks his mother:
Followed by the exact words he says: Quid hodie in horto facere possumus, si avia non cantat?

In Latin (and in modern editions of Latin):

A colon or similar punctuation typically introduces direct speech.
Direct speech keeps the original word order, pronouns, and verb person (like possumus).

An indirect question version would look different, for example:

Puer fessus matrem rogat quid hodie in horto facere possint, si avia non cantet.
Here we see:
- No colon, no quotation marks.
- quid introducing an indirect question.
- possint, cantet in the subjunctive.

Your sentence is the straightforward direct-quotation type.

Does Latin word order here have to be exactly Puer fessus matrem rogat, or can it be changed?

Latin word order is quite flexible, especially in prose. You could see variations like:

Puer fessus rogat matrem
Matrem puer fessus rogat
Rogat puer fessus matrem

All can still mean The tired boy asks his mother. The chosen order often reflects rhythm and emphasis:

Puer fessus matrem rogat ends on the verb, a common Latin pattern.
Putting matrem first (Matrem puer fessus rogat) could slightly highlight mother.

Similarly, inside the question, you could move many elements:

Quid possumus hodie in horto facere?
Hodie quid in horto facere possumus?

All are acceptable; the basic relationships are shown by endings, not by strict order.